Politician Archive

1) Place a cap on player maintenance so a max of 3 months can be paid in.

2) Remove the current system of condeming the structure and replace it with auto-packup of the structure to the owner's datapad.

If a player is gone for 3 months and noone else pays the maintenance it will pack-up. This will permit structures that others are paying maintenance on to remain behind. It is a non-griefing system and noone loses anything due to maintenance.

3) When the owner returns they have to pay up back owed maintenance fees and then they can replace the structure.

4) For residency structures an auto-pack due to lack of maintenance will not remove the citizen from the town immediately.

a) The mayor will be notified via holo-mail that a CitizenX's house was "condemned" (auto-packed actually) - this gives the city a chance to find a replacement before the next update.

To do this in a slow and controlled way,the auto-pack concept should be ushered in in stages.

Wk0 - Implement the new maintenance cap and place all extra credits into the owner's bank.

-Begin purges-

Wk1 - 24month+ inactives "autopacked" if their structure has no maintenance

Wk2 - 18month+

Wk3 -12month+

Wk4 - 10month+

Wk5 - 8month+

Wk6 - 6month+

Wk7 - 4month+

Wk6 - 3month+

Wk5and onward for adnauseum - Out of maintenance (no longer based on inactivity)

After this is in place and working, then an idea can be considered to phase out "extra lots by using an inactive player's structures".

B.Fix /cityban. Personally I think /cityban is a waste of9 keypresses, but it would make sense if there was some way to manage this ghostly menace.

The following would be good admin additions to the cityban command.

1. The ability to access a menu in the city hall to see who is city banned - at least for the mayor and the malitia members.


2. Notification to the mayor via holo-mail when someone is city banned

Cityban would become useful if it would disallow the banned player from *all* city services, including the following:

1. becoming a citizen through any means, including/transferstructure or city expansion. This may be the case today, but it is not documented if that is the case.


2. viewing the information about a city from the city & voting terminals. If you are city banned you have no business keeping tabs on the city - after all these are computer terminals and should be able to have basic security measures.


3. taking missions (this would give a line of defense against credit farmers).


4. access to all city (mayor placed only)structures (this would take care of #2 & #3). However,leavethe decision to ban access up to the owners/admins of hospitals, cantinas, theatres, vendors, and any other non-mayor/city "owned" structures.


5. aperson who is banned has an "all chat"/addignore on them while they are within the city limits of the city they are banned from. This one would rock!As it wouldmake the player not want tobe in the city's limits so that they can use spatial, tell, groupsay, and other chats. Basically the city uses technology to scramble communications from this player.


6. Keep thecurrent shuttle port and vehicle repair restrictions.

B. Make the city terminal's citizen list useful. Items 2 and 3 are in case the purge is eventually going to happen - and to help mayors see how their city is doing so they can plan accordingly

1. Provide the following sort capabilities




• Name


• Order of last login (top players are most recently active)


• Distance from city hall


2. Add a column to the right of the citizen's name that provides a city level number indicating what city level ring that citizen lives in.


3. Add another column that will indicate if the player is safely active or in danger of a purge

1. Houses where residence is established that are absorbed into a city by expansion or new town hall placement are not automatically added to the city - this needs to be a concious effort of the owner and the city


2. For cities with zoning turned on, the owner cannot become a citizen unless granted zoning rights


3. Permit zoning for level 1 cities.


4. Once theresidentbecomes a citizen in the city then his house is included in property taxes and obviously the owner is then susceptible to income tax.


5. This does not apply to structures that are not the owner's residence - thus property taxes would still be charged to absorbed structures other than a declared residence.

That's my top 5.

In light of recent posts, I wish to register that some Politicians andcitizens (including me)wish to keep the caps as they are.

(I know you have that mentioned Khristen, just want to make sure it doesn't get lost in the shuffle. )

Mira Luka
The Last Tailor Correspondent
Join the SWGTailor forums and keep our community alive!
I quit because of the NGE. Goodbye, my friends.

---

Khristen wrote:

Politicians would like to have a city terrain feature to make their cities look more like cities.

• Mayors would like some way to differentiate Player Cities from random collection of houses. While we recognize that terraforming is a difficult technical challenge, perhaps something could be added to structure footprints to give the appearance of pavement or trimmed yards. Another suggestion was segments of pavement skin that could be laid down (without interfering with structure placement) by the Mayor over the existing terrain.

---

I was thinking about this, not sure if it has been mentioned, but how about a situation where when you place a city hall, it lays down a "rug" over the existing ground. not over the rocks or trees, buy effectivly placing a flat matte down. Initially it would be the radius of a starting city, but as structures get added to the city's edge they would generate their own zone.

I know that it's been mentioned that NPC cities can do it becuase they have perm, modded the ground in those areas. But one day I loaded into Kadarra and laggedback a 10k meters (something I am sure we are all familure with) and when I was jetted back to where I was supposed to be I noticed where kadarra should have been, for a few seconds, there was nothing but flat ground.

Message Edited by thegreyman on 10-04-2005 07:47 AM

Credit for the idea to drachenfire.

How it works now: When someone places a city, there is an area around it that is reserved in case the city makes it up to metropolis. No other cities can be placed so that their future area would overlap with this.

Idea: When someone places a city, this areabecomes a no-build zoneso that no structures can be placed in it unless and until the city absorbs the area. Possibly allow the militia to grant zoning in this areas, but then that makes it awful like having the area be part of the city right away.

Problem: Potential for exploiting by people placing a city hall with no intention of constructing a city, but only so that other people cannot place a structure. (ex. PvP, placing a city hall so someone can't place a new base)

Partial Solution: The no-build zone will only take effect after the 24 hour, 10 citizen mark has been reached.

Mira Luka
The Last Tailor Correspondent
Join the SWGTailor forums and keep our community alive!
I quit because of the NGE. Goodbye, my friends.

---

MiraLuka3 wrote:

Credit for the idea to drachenfire.

How it works now: When someone places a city, there is an area around it that is reserved in case the city makes it up to metropolis. No other cities can be placed so that their future area would overlap with this.

Idea: When someone places a city, this areabecomes a no-build zoneso that no structures can be placed in it unless and until the city absorbs the area. Possibly allow the militia to grant zoning in this areas, but then that makes it awful like having the area be part of the city right away.

Problem: Potential for exploiting by people placing a city hall with no intention of constructing a city, but only so that other people cannot place a structure. (ex. PvP, placing a city hall so someone can't place a new base)

Partial Solution: The no-build zone will only take effect after the 24 hour, 10 citizen mark has been reached.

---

1) So when a city is founded a total area of 450 meters is set aside for all furture development, no one else could place a building here, but any pre-founded houses would be grandfathered in as they are now. The mayor and citizens can place buildings anywhere in this circumference of future growth, but the mayor could only count the residents in the 150/ 200/ 300/ 400/ 450 meters as residents as they are now.

This releaves the mayor and the community from worring about hostile take overs by those that agressively place their residents just outside a current border and awaiting an expansion, then once included vote out the founding mayor.

This also releaves much potiential grief by anyone who unwittenly placed say... 300 meters away and didnt realize a city was behind that hill there let alone will expand to include him. Remember the buildings pre-existing would still be grandfathered.. this is 'reservation is for any future developement.

Message Edited by drachenfire on 10-06-2005 10:01 AM

I also wish the city rank-caps were removed as it is pointless. If you have placed a city and are ambitious enough and you get your residents, you should be able to advance up.

I feel it is obnoxious and negitive to not allow the full range of politican abilities to a politician, and equally abnoxious to not allow an entire community that has the residency base not to advance to the next level.

It encourages a negitive expierence that has no real positivebenifit. What do the already established rank-based level4 and 5cities have to gain by keeping rank-city caps as they are? They get the security that they can recruit that person who wants a shuttle port now rather then take a chance on a starter community. It creates tension in player communities stuck at rank 2 and 3, who chose to found their city far from the static cities. This tension comes from an insecure future of their city praying for the demotion of an already estabilshed city.

While compitition is a good thing... for an entire player community to have to hope and pray for the demotion of another so they can advance is a negitive player expierence for many communities out there.

Reguardless if the actual number of cities are raised, there is no benifit to keeping each player city that is founded from advancing.

Hmm, guess I haven't posted this here yet.

Issues:

1. Player city growth/rank caps. These need to go altogether. They truly serve no good purpose any more. I don't necessarily care if the shuttleport cap is removed or not (or just flat out 20 per planet for every planet), but you shouldn't limit a city's growing potential with a cap.

Wish List:

1. Help us expand recruiting/traffic efforts. When you can register your city on the map, you should be able to provide a brief description of the city that appears on the planetary map. This could be used to talk about the city, mention your services, your mall, etc.


2. An addition to #1: new player city structure - Commerce Center. This is a building crafted by Architects that has more of a "mall" layout to it (somewhat like the NPC guild halls). This structure can be registered on the planetary map as a "mall" and also allows for a brief description to describe the vendors it has in, any sales going on, etc. It requires more maintenance than a large house.

---

Noaso wrote:

I think Player City caps should be left where they are. Once the character purge goes into effect, those suffering due to the cap will find that either the problem will rectified itself OR they need to a) deal b) consider joining a larger more established city rather than perpetuating additional smaller cities.

Eminent Domain.

---

Oh come on...who does it hurt to get rid of city growth caps? Besides, of course, mayors who fear better cities arising unhindered and who rely on this cap to maintain their prominence.

Your post describes what is commonly called 'the drawbridge mentality'. I was here first, so consider joining a larger more established city rather than perpetuating additional smaller cities. Whats wrong with perpetuating smaller cities?

Removing city growth caps harms absolutely no one, but will definitely improve the quality of gaming for those citizens who have been waiting for level three for 18 months or more.

18 months.../shudder...